1. Field of the Invention
The invention is directed toward computer systems, and more particularly to a computer system for implementing an industry-wide business to business exchange.
2. Description of Related Art
When looking at an industry, for example the automobile industry, one can see that there are several independent companies producing automobiles in competition with each other. A wide variety of parts, assemblies, subassemblies and services are required in a rather extensive supply chain in order to ensure that a particular automobile manufacturer has everything needed to assemble the final product, namely an automobile. Historically, each of the suppliers of goods and services, if computerized at all, had individualized systems, some proprietary and some open for carrying out their business. Historically, there have been no common hardware, software or data standards. Each company more or less assembled their own systems to meet their needs.
There have been some efforts at standardization. For example, the Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) standard was introduced. Development of EDI like standards also occurred in different countries. Because of this, the standards that evolved had not only an industry orientation but also a geographical one. The result was overlapping data structures across multiple industries and different geographies but there was not inter-operability among the standards.
The proliferation of multiple EDI standards increased the cost of implementing EDI. Cross-Industry players, such as transportation firms, found themselves having to learn and implement different EDI data structures depending on the industry they served and the region in which they operated. Standards that became the dominant form for conducting e-Commerce are the ANSI X12 in North America; TRADACOMS in the United Kingdom; GENCOD in France (Retail); Uniform Communications Standard for the U.S. grocery industry; and VDA-SEDAS in Germany. Gradually, different industry groups came together to create one international data standard, EDIFACT (Electronic Data Interchange for Administration, Commerce and Transport). Today, most trade between companies in two different countries is based on the EDIFACT standard.
Concurrently, many companies began to practice Just-N-Time (JIT) inventory management. As long as goods and services are flowing smoothly, a manufacturer could reduce inventory costs by having the parts needed arrive just in time for assembly. That reduced the cost of inventory storage and management. Nevertheless, it created a situation in which individual suppliers might be adversely impacted by some occurrence and the impact of a suppliers delivery problems on the manufacturer might not be appreciated until it was too late to provide for alternative sources. Accordingly, there's arose a need for supply chain management which allows visibility of the status of all participants in an individual manufacturer's chain.
Anti-trust and administrators of anti-competitive laws, both in the U.S. and in foreign markets, have become active individually and collectively against an improper exercise of “monopoly” and power. As a result, it was virtually unthinkable that the major players in the industry, such as the automobile industry, could share purchasing systems without incurring a substantial potential for anti-trust sanctions.
Because of these conditions, the market place for goods and services provided to a major industry, such as the automobile industry, was fragmented and slow. A purchasing official needed to check multiple sources, one at a time, in order to determine the best price, availability or other decision-important information. Not only did one have to check with different sources, one needed to sign on to different systems, each having an interface that was different and unique to that particular company. If electronic connection was not available, then telephone or fax would be used to make inquiries or provide orders. This resulted in a very slow and inefficient procurement process for both the manufacturers and suppliers.
These conditions possibly actually inhibited competition by making it difficult for new suppliers to break into the market place and to make the products and services known to major purchasers. Further, individual companies would be required to market separately to different manufacturers in the same industry. Further, the absence of readily available pricing information resulted in higher cost and a slower adjustment to market place changes.
A few portals that were established were specific to a particular manufacturer and didn't reach across the entire industry. Further, branding that occurred on the portal was the branding of the portal and not that of the individual suppliers. Further, different catalogs from different sources needed to be maintained. There were some earlier attempts at vertical supply chain integration, but these were limited to a single manufacturer and not to the manufacturer's competitors.
Different forms were utilized for each of the various electronic systems and for each of the paper systems. This made the forms difficult to learn and the information, once learned, not transferable to other companies or suppliers.